Flying against the wind:
How to prevent resistance, when designing
for organizational emergence
1
Flying against the wind
How to prevent resistance, when designing for organizational
emergence
Jos Westerkamp
s2023520 June 2014University of Groningen, Faculty of Economics and Business, combined master thesis MSc BA Strategic Innovation Management and MSc Marketing Management.
Supervisor MSc BA Strategic Innovation Management: Prof. dr. ir. J.M.L. van Engelen Supervisor MSc Marketing Management: Dr. D. Trampe
2
Management summary
The city of Antwerp found itself in 2003 in a downward spiral of negativism, bureaucracy and no clear direction for the future. New officials choose a non-conventional approach to bring back the feeling of a community. The new method implemented was the Imagineering model and its first step was to reframe the city’s logic, which is the base where every thought process starts from (Nijs, 2014).The logic was changed through a strategically designed new logo with a tagline in the narrative mode: “t Stad is van iedereen” (the city is from
everybody). As it changed people’s thought process it changed the way people talked to each other. Conversations became constructive and it caused city officials to become more open, less silo-minded. Subsequently it invited inhabitants to become active creators of value. Nowadays participation is enormous as co-creation initiatives are developed between the city and all kinds of stakeholders in the city. The city vibrancy with the narrative as internal point of reference that preserved the new identity caused Antwerp to win the Financial Times award for best small city in 2011.
The Imagineering model is not an approach with straight line to the final result. Its goal is to change the organizational logic and therewith evoke continuing change between all
stakeholders to cope with today’s complexity. Traditional management techniques, which focuses on execution and control no longer seem to hold because there is never a right formula if the process is filled with unknowable’s” (Nijs,2014). The complexity of the world around us is increasing rapidly. Due to the pace of technological innovations organizations are caught up in transparency, turbulence and uncertainty. Although nowadays, customers want strong support in meeting the challenges and technologies in production and transportation are available to provide this strong support. An enterprise logic that links these events is missing (Zuboff & Maxmin, 2002). Nijs (2014) constructed the Imagineering model that changes the business logic which makes an organization thrive on today’s complex environment.
3
But identities rest just as much in the individual as in the conversations in which they are socially engaged, shifting conversations can therefore have profound implications for a person’s identity. Therefore the narrative poses a considerable threat to those who have internalized the old enterprise logic of transaction (Nijs, 2014). Resulted resistance or non-acceptance of the narrative causes the process to end before it even has lift off. Explorative literature research and field research with advertisement experts resulted in improvement of the Imagineering model of Nijs (2014). The result of the research is a new conceptual model that should be used to increase the narrative acceptance when the IM is implemented (see figure 1). The model enhances the understanding and controllability of the process between the narrative is send out till the narrative is accepted. Furthermore the model can serve as base for asking questions about the course of stakeholder acceptance. The narrative or sensegiving device has the aim to send out a preferred organizational reality followed up with the sub-step that the target groups will ask themselves: What is going on? They make sense of the situation (sensemaking). Next to that the target group will question the narrative on how legit this appeal is (perceived legitimacy). And to end the intermediate steps the target group will ask themselves: Is this something I can identify with? Or, in other words: Do I want to publically show that I support this? (identification).
4
Furthermore, in order to prevent stakeholders from creating a counter narratives when implementing the IM, it is of key importance to have customer insights. If you want to know how to talk, you need to know who you’re talking to. Customer insights helps to find a way to stand out, so individuals will use your constructed preferred reality to form an opinion.
5
Table of content
Introduction ... 6
1. Theoretical framework ... 11
1.1 The Imagineering model... 11
1.2 Literature review ... 14
1.3 A game of managing meaning ... 15
Narrative and sensegiving ... 15
Sensemaking ... 16
Legitimacy ... 17
Consumer- company (dis)identification ... 18
How identification is formed? ... 19
The conceptual model ... 20
2. Methodology ... 21
2.1 Case study design ... 21
2.2 Quality criteria ... 22 3. Results ... 25 3.1 Ogilvy cases ... 26 3.2 KesselsKramer cases ... 27 3.3 G2K cases ... 29 3.4 Other findings ... 31 Perceived legitimacy ... 33
4. Discussion and provisional conclusions ... 35
4.1 Conclusions about propositions and the research question ... 35
Extra findings ... 37
4.2 Managerial implications ... 38
4.3 Limitations and directions for future research ... 38
References ... 40
Appendix A ... 43
Initial questionnaire ... 43
Appenidix B transcripted interviews ... 47
Interview transcript G2K ... 47
Interview transcript Ogilvy & Mather ... 57
6
Introduction
The oldest retail change in Belgium, Veritas had become almost bankrupt in 2003. The specialist in fashion accessories and sewing materials, founded in 1892, found itself in heavy weather due to the global trend in the fashion-industry in which women easily buy their clothes than make them from scratch. Nevertheless in 2011 Veritas received the award of ‘Retail chain of the year’ in Belgium and is grown from 60 to 100 shops. What happened? In the eight years between the survival and the success the chain underwent a major
7
invitation to all stakeholders to co-create. And it brought back Veritas’ relevance as people became more happy by being creative instead of being a fashion victim. And the firm tries to give women inspiration to make fashion again something personal (Nijs, 2014). The
Imagineering model results in engagement and co-creation with as well customers, employees as other partners, which is company-directed behavior that is qualitatively distinct from those typically obtained in the market place (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003). That makes the
Imagineering model an indisputable contribution to the field of marketing and innovation management.
The success can in part be explained by changes in the market place. The complexity of the world around us is increasing rapidly. The Imagineering model is underpinned by the view of the world as a system that evolves, interacts, is interconnected and interdependent. The Imagineering design approach makes use of the characteristics of complex systems through liberating the imagination and the collective creativity of all direct and indirect stakeholders in an envisioned direction in a way that it becomes an engine for sustainable change and it provides a way to become a center of a value-creating network (Nijs, 2014). Past events indicated that this direction, such as the change in the definition of marketing in 2004 by the American Marketing Association, changed from being centered around the concept of exchange, towards an orientation on the co-creation of value and relationships shifting from goods to a service dominant logic. Furthermore authorities in the academic business literature, Porter and Kramer (2011) stated that companies should not have a focus solely on
profitability advocated by shareholders. Instead companies should focus on responsibility and thereby taking into account the perspective of all the stakeholders. In order to do so firms should identify their value network in which it wants to play an orchestrating role. And therein identify gaps that can be strengthened which results in benefits for the firm as well as society at (Porter & Kramer, 2011). Zuboff and Maxmin (2002) announces a new era that abandons the current enterprise logic which focuses on transaction, mass production and mass consumption. Two conditions are already realized that cause this shift. Firstly the change in customer needs, individuals now have the need for self-support, and demand honest assistance in meeting the challenges of their intricate lives. Deep support provides an ongoing
relationship, based on mutual respect, trust and an intelligent alignment of interests which cannot be addressed by the transactional enterprise logic (Zuboff & Maxmin, 2002). Secondly new technologies in production, communication and transportation are able to provide
8
to embrace the infinite complexity, intelligence and plasticity that is required to serve the individualization of consumption. And a third condition, which has not yet been met
according to Zuboff and Maxmin (2002), is an enterprise logic that legitimizes management practices that effectively link the new technologies to the new markets. The lack of a new business logic becomes clearer and more articulated. But people in the field experimenting with an evolutionary approach of growing into this new business logic are limited (Nijs, 2014). The current thesis makes a contribution to complement the pioneering Imagineering approach of how to change a business logic of Nijs (2014). The central construct in the Imagineering method is to inspire and evoke imagination that subsequently changes the dialogue between stakeholders into a generative dialogue aimed at co-creation. Because communication is the primary means by which change is generated, it is the micro-level interactions among organizational members throughout the organization that shape the organizational reality (Zandee, 2011). The instigator of the change in conversations is a strategically designed narrative that evokes imagination. The narrative is an artful lens that is integrated in the organizational identity by using the logo and tagline (Nijs, 2014). The Imagineering model contributes to the field of marketing, strategy and innovation since it changes the way the organization communicates and innovates with the customer. It has become evident that complexity in society is growing exponentially and ignoring the transparency and connectedness is no longer a responsible option. It is of importance that managers of today extend their linear approaches of planning and controlling with a more complex approach of strategizing. The Imagineering method (IM) guides managers’ actions when responding to complexities that are beyond the competence of any single discipline (Nijs, 2014). Because the narrative is the first step in the discursive model, it is the driving force and constant reminder of doing business in a new way. And thereby it is of utmost importance that the narrative is accepted. Nijs (2014) makes extensive use of case studies where the IM is implemented as Veritas and the city of Antwerp where reported resistance is minimal. In fact, when the next mayor of Antwerp wanted to change the narrative citizens revolted to prevent that the narrative would change. But there are cases known like for example the Dutch railway company (NS) were the designed narrative was unacceptable. After the denationalization, the NS became accountable for the level of service they offered to their customers and these developments resulted in reform plans called “Destination:
9
narrative “circling around the church” which became the dominant narrative in the debate. This narrative resulted in the opposite of what the general director had envisioned and resulted in a serious blemished image (Beerendse et al., 2006). Another example were the implementation of the IM wasn’t a straight line was the case of Mechelen (Nijs, 2014). The Belgian city Mechelen tried to copy the IM that was implemented in Antwerp to boost the city vibrancy but here it resulted in a collective against the new narrative. Although a brief
analysis about the three orientations that a narrative should require is presented, a more in depth analysis is lacking as to why the narrative in Mechelen did not engage people.
Moreover a successful narrative should be renewed over time since the imaginative tension is not timeless (Nijs, 2014) indicate the importance for an excellent understanding of the
narrative acceptance since it is a continuing process. Furthermore the cases of the NS and the city of Mechelen show that the implementation of a narrative that change the way people talk to each other, in a generative manner, is not a straight forward line. On the contrary a
successfully designed narrative would be the continuous driver of non-proportional change but a narrative that not lands among the target audience brings the risk that the strength of the collective will turn against the organization. And this could result in non-proportional
deconstructed actions such as counter narratives, boycotts and strikes. Now the fine line between collective creativity and collective resistance has become clear, insights are welcome on how to turn the strength of the collective into a positive strength. Or in other words: How to prevent collective resistance? The report at hand aims to fill this gap and therefore the main research question is:
How to prevent customers/ stakeholders from creating a counter narrative, as a reaction to a designed narrative in the IM ?
10
11
1. Theoretical framework
In order to create a well-developed stance on the Imagineering method and the challenges it faces on how to prevent stakeholders from creating a counter narrative this chapter will start by introducing the Imagineering model and define its steps. Subsequently, to get a profound understanding on acceptation and adverse behavior regarding organizational narratives, this chapter reviews relevant literature which will lead to propositions about intermediate steps between the narrative and the mind-shift. The proposed constructs and relations are displayed in a conceptual model, a visual framework that can be used to enhance the understanding and controllability of the narrative design and implementation (see fig. 2.1).
1.1 The Imagineering model
12
prospective customers talk to each other, since the ongoing interactions among human beings shape the organizational reality (Nijs, 2014). The way people talk to each other creates changes in the way people act and therefore communication is the primary means change is generated. The qualities of the conversation we embody determine the ways in which we jointly create realities which we aspire (Nijs, 2014). Hence it is important to structure and conduct these qualities including who talks to who, when, where and about what. In current business model the conversation qualities are embedded but not pre-defined, it is a mental map, a conception. Reframing the business conception by reframing the conversation qualities for example with new thoughts, interactions and routines is important as it involves not only a shift in processes and structures but also a cognitive organizational reorientation (Fiss and Zajac, 2006). When someone shifts a conversation, they shift what people talk about and pay attention to (Ford, 1999). Reframing the business concept towards a new enterprise logic can be done by designing an imaginative tension, defined as “an internally felt urgency to act and that drives the system far away from its equilibrium norm and evokes an inspiring innovation horizon” (Nijs, 2014). A central argument in the study of Nijs (2014) is that a manager can design and imaginative tension by redesigning the business concept. The new business concept has three requirements:
- It should inspire a new relational perspective where customers and other stakeholders are seen as ‘participants’ in value creation.
- It should inspire a new relevance perspective: changing the orientation from creating shareholder value towards creating value for society at large. The business concept should cause a tension among stakeholders to participate in the processes of value creation.
- It should, when articulated in the narrative mode, have heuristic and holistic
properties. This implies that articulation of the narrative should appeal to the emotions and imagination of all stakeholders (Nijs, 2014).
The first step in the IM to change the enterprise logic is to determine the current deep logic and next what the more desirable business logic should be (see figure 1.1). Therefore opportunities should be identified that offer the possibility of co-creation between
13
effectiveness of the adaptive tension it is important that the narrative becomes visible in the organization and its environment. Hence the new narrative should be used in outward
utterances, such as, for example the logo and slogan. As a result everybody involved realizes that all stakeholders have the same information/invitation, and that the shift is supported by the total community which is important since people want to change when others are also changing (Nijs, 2014). The narrative will cause an adaptive tension that results in a shift in focus among stakeholders, away from a shareholder orientation towards a society relevance orientation. The narrative invites stakeholders to reflect current roles, relationships and procedures and to experiment with new actions to co-create via the micro-processes.
Realizing strategic innovation is not just a matter of generating ideas but is above all a matter of coordinating and sustaining innovation on the longer term in every detail of action (Nijs, 2014). In the next step scholars expect that old and new forms will compete for resources in the unstable phase. Therefore it is important that management encourages with positive feedback anything which reinforces the new business concept (Gemmil & Smith 1985). An example would be a book where the basic principles, values and criteria to participate are written down.
14
In the period of experimentation, the organization selects a new form of behavior which aligns with its new networked deep structure of value co-creation in order to be able to function under more complex conditions. In contrast to the old sequential logic these experiments with new roles, relationships and procedures happen simultaneously once the new concept is introduced. In order to manage the risk of reversion to the previous business concept continuous nurturing of events is required. Not only positive feedback but also stabilization dynamics are crucial for successful transition (Nijs, 2014). Because feedback and stabilization mechanisms such as a small book or movie with the declaration of values which facilitates a collective mind, shapes novelties and guides choices in a way consistent with the system’s accumulated history and learning, preserving the system’s identity and core behavioral patterns (Gemmill & Smith, 1985). Many stakeholders start to think about co-creation with the new organization to create synergies that will make themselves more relevant. This results in a self-propelling firm through continuous innovation with all stakeholders. And the initial firm can be relevant for society at large in such a way that no other organization is able to, the Strategic Direction (Nijs, 2014).
1.2 Literature review
In order to answer the research question the literature review started with reviewing central outcomes of the IM: customer engagement and extra-role behavior. As the introduction of this report describes, the stakeholder behavior in the cases of Veritas and Antwerp showed
behavioral manifestations that were beyond the focus solely on transaction (van Doorn et al., 2010). Stakeholders have developed a deep connection with the narratives and in consumer research, this connection has been termed as identification (Press & Arnould, 2011).
Identification is also a key antecedent of cognitive engagement (Walker et al., 2005). Subsequent literature research recognized that identification is formed through
communication between organizations and constituents (Ashfort et al., 2008). Further research yielded the concepts of sensegiving and sensemaking because sensegiving shows great similarity with the narrative as it is defined as “the communicative process of
influencing the meaning construction of a constituent about a preferred organizational reality” (Press & Arnould, 2011). Next, the multiple constituents develop different understandings in the sensemaking process and this results in multiple discourses and micro-politics of
15
initial concept of identification as an identity rests just as much in the individual as in the discourses in which they are socially engaged. Which means that shifting conversations and discursive practices can therefore have profound implications for the identities and
relationships of those who operate within them (Ford, 1999). In the context of the IM, the four concepts derived from the literature review seem plausible and relevant, hence, this report elaborates on these concepts to make a first opening in the black box of narrative adoption and rejection.
1.3 A game of managing meaning
Before the adaptive tension of the narrative creates a mind-shift, consumers have to accept and internalize the narrative. The transformation to a new logic is not just about
improvements in the current logic or reengineering, it is about changing the underlying structure of value creation. Therefore the tension poses a considerable threat to those who have internalized the enterprise logic of transaction (Nijs, 2014). The designed tension will be amplified by all the interpretations and conversations that build upon one another and emerge into something big. Nijs (2014) refers to this effect as the butterfly effect, which is derived from the story that a hurricane is formed through a distant butterfly that flaps its wings. In upcoming paragraphs theory will be reviewed on how resistance is formed towards the narrative, or when taken the butterfly effect into account, what causes the proverbial butterfly to fly against the wind.
Narrative and sensegiving
As explained in paragraph 1.1 the narrative initiates new perspective on the role of customers in the organization and the beneficiaries of the value created in that new partnership. The narrative is a sensegiving device which refers to the communicative process of influencing the sensemaking and meaning construction of individuals about a preferred organizational reality. This sensegiving flows primarily from the organization to individuals (Press & Arnould, 2011). The preferred organizational reality is conveyed to stakeholders through “rites, rituals and routines” communicated through a variety of sensegiving devices like: narratives, official documents, press releases, logos, employees, corporate social initiatives and external
16
knowledge decrease the consumer confidence in their ability to make identity-based judgments (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003). We derive the following based on the above reasoning:
Proposition 1: the more an individual is exposed to sensegiving devices such as the narrative, the more likely it is that the individual uses that knowledge to make sense of the situation. In other words the relationship between the narrative and customer sensemaking is mediated by the perceived amount of knowledge the individual has.
Sensemaking
In order to create a mind-shift and chancing roles among stakeholders, the narrative is designed in such a way that it will change the way people talk to each other, indicating the importance of conversations. Organizations are socially constructed from networks of conversations (Ford, 1999). Were the sensegiving device flows from the organization to the individuals sensemaking is about meaning construction among individuals and can be constructed between an organization and its stakeholders, among stakeholders, and even within the individual (Press &Arnould, 2011). Dialogues promote shared understandings and lead to a degree of collective coherence and continuity (Humphreys & Brown, 2002).
However, it is clear that organizations are not discursively monolithic, but pluralistic and multiple dialogues occur simultaneously (Ford, 1999). Stakeholders have the latitude to author their own reality shaped by the available discourses (Humphreys & Brown, 2002). This by an stakeholder created reality is a second order reality, which are facts attached with a meaning derived from interpretations of what is going on (Ford, 1999). The development of these meanings takes place through sensemaking, a constant process where actors try to align their perception of the new situation with their view of the old situation and where people ask themselves: what is going on? (Berendse, 2006). In the sensemaking process people can consider if there is (in)congruence or not between the organizational and individual values. Hence organizational change involves inherently a struggle over meaning and will be manifested in multiple (counter) narratives that fight for acceptance in order to legitimize or delegitimize the process of change (Berendse, 2006).
17
organization as legitimate is mediated by the extent to which an individual can make sense of the situation.
Legitimacy
Legitimacy has been defined as the comprehensibility, desirability and appropriateness of the actions of an entity (Suchman, 1995), and as the congruity between organizational actions and social values (Dowling & Pfeffer, 1975). Derived from the theory of distributed self, identities rest just as much in the individual as in the conversations in which they are socially engaged and embedded, shifting conversations and discursive practices can therefore have profound implications for the identities and relationships of those who operate within them (Ford, 1999). Delegitimizing the conversations has due to the identification processes extensive effects on the individual sense of self. Because individuals tend to legitimize their work activities and the organizations in which they are involved: “In acknowledging the legitimacy of the groups and organizations with which they identify, individuals are tacitly reaffirming their sense of self” (Elsbach & Bhattacharya, 2001). Organizations are seen as key
components of people’s social identity (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003). And there is a high degree of reciprocal inter-dependence between the legitimacy needs of the individuals and the organization (Humphreys & Brown, 2002). Once an individual has tied his self-esteem to the organization they are highly motivate to enhance the organization external image (Brown, 1997). Consumers in a consumer-company relationship transform into fervent supporters of the company and their products and seek greater interaction with it (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003; Scott & Lane, 2000). The process of identification is initiated only when the
organizational identity is perceived as legitimate, that is desirable, proper and appropriate and therewith enhances individual self- esteem (Lane & Scott 2000). We derive the following based on above reasoning:
18
Consumer- company (dis)identification
Along with the growing turbulence of society and organizations there’s an increase of individual desire for identification with organizations (Ashforth et al, 2008). Identification represents the connection between a target and an individual’s self-concept and self-esteem (Lane & Scott 2000). A target of identification can represent an organization,
brand, employee, community, or any other object that can represent an identity (Lane & Scott, 2007). The underlying motives for a person to link one’s self-concept and self-esteem to a target is that the target’s definitional or evaluative properties are used for one’s self thereby reduce uncertainty and enhance individual’s self-concept and self-esteem (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003). By linking with a company’s identity that is perceived as being well liked and respected, people fulfill the need to feel good about oneself and to be validated positively by people one cares about (Wolter, 2014). Although an individual may not be an employee or actual member of an organization, he or she identifies with an organization to take part in its social, product, financial, or market success (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003). Uncertainty pushes individuals to categorize themselves into established social groups to obtain a higher degree of predictability. These groups describes how group members behave and interact with each other and offer pre-determined beliefs, attitudes and behavior regarding in-group and out-group members (Wolter, 2014). Similar to consumer-company identification, disidentifying with the company is also a mechanism to preserve the self-concept (Elsbach and
Bhattacharya, 2001). However, in this case, “the self-concept is preserved not by developing a connection with the organization but through a sense of separation” (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003). In order to enhance one’s self there is a cognitive separation between a person's
19
How identification is formed?
Identification and disidentifcation and the resulting attitude change is not made on the basis of consumer characteristics or brand features and attributes but on the basis of specific
organizational ideologies, policies, and practices (Elsbach & Bhattacharya, 2002). Other research suggests that people’s identification with an organization is based on their
perceptions of its core or defining characteristics that are distinctive from other organizations and relatively enduring over time (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003; Scott & lane 2000).
Feelings of connectedness (i.e., identification), separation (i.e., disidentification), and also indifference are constructed on the basis of evaluations of overlap with the person's identity and self-concept with the person’s beliefs and inferences with regard to the organizational characteristics coupled with his or her prior knowledge and experience with the organization, as well as the organizations' reputation (Elsbach & Bhattacharya, 2002). As mentioned in the sensemaking paragraph, the organizational identity is communicated through sensegiving devices like the narrative but also official documents, press releases, and corporate social initiatives (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003; Press &Arnoud, 2011). Organizations manage
organizational legitimacy largely through organizational communications, thereby stating the importance of not only to have an attractive identity but also to have the customer embedded and an identity that is salient (Scott & Lane, 2000). Since firm identification is most likely to occur when those organizational values are central to the individual social identity and that the characteristics of the organization are distinctive and enduring (Elsback & Bhattacharya, 2001). The narrative in the IM can also be characterized as central because in order to create an adaptive tension it is important that the narrative becomes visible in the organization and its environment. Identification with the organization increases members’ long term
commitment and support for the organization (Mael & Ashforth, 1995). And disidentification evidently leads to the opposite namely counter organizational actions. To avoid cognitive dissonance associated with acting inconsistently with prior commitment and beliefs
individuals are likely to boycott the product and services of the firm (Elsback & Bhattacharya, 2001). But a complete boycott may seem difficult especially if the companies have
20
Proposition 4: the more an individual identifies with an organization, the smaller the chance that a counter narrative will be created as reaction towards the organizational designed narrative. In other words the relationship between the individual and the reaction towards the narrative (commitment/ counter narrative) is mediated by the perceived identification of the individual with the organization.
The conceptual model
The literature review resulted in four propositions about the barriers in the first step of the IM, between the Narrative and the Mind-shift. The proposed intermediate steps are an addition to the discursive IM and are visual displayed below in the conceptual model, figure 2.1. The depicted “P1” till “P4” indicate the propositions and their location in the conceptual model. Furthermore the arrows stand for the directions stakeholders can make. Light blue stands for the ideal track were stakeholders take all steps with the end-state the mind-shift. And the red arrows stand for the possibility that something in one of the narrative/sensegiving,
sensemaking, perceived legitimacy and identification steps hinders them to take the next step and therefore end up at resistance.
21
2. Methodology
This chapter gives a description of the procedures and research methods conducted to answer the research question and to investigate the proposed constructs and relations. As the research question leads to the need to complement the model of Nijs (2014) the literature review resulted in four proposed intermediated steps between the narrative and the mind-shift, visual displayed in the conceptual model, figure 2.1. The purpose of this field research is to
challenge the propositions. A case study approach is best suitable to increase knowledge and to make an original contribution to academic literature, especially when “the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident" (Yin, 2014). Which is the case due to the the pioneering character of the IM of Nijs (2014) in the field of Marketing and strategy and innovation.
2.1 Case study design
The type of research will be a multiple holistic case design. The multiple case study design allows for rich insights due to replication, pattern finding and (dis)confirmation between cases (Yin, 2014). These insights match the research question which has an exploratory character. The research question combined with the four propositions serve as the main point of this qualitative research. The propositions derived from the literature research propose constructs and mechanisms that play a role in the process of consumer acceptance of messages send out by a company. Assumed experts on the process of consumer message acceptance and message effectiveness in general are advertisement agencies. Therefore thirty advertisement agencies in the Netherlands were found via an internet search and emailed with a proposal to share knowledge about their expertise. Three of the agencies responded positive. Those three agencies were sent back a summary of the Imagineering model. The focus of the interviews was on narrative examples brought by the advertisement specialist that created successfully a mind-shift and role change and narratives that had disappointing results or which even caused counter narratives.
Data collection
22
importance of the pre-proposed constructs and the relation between the constructs. Semi-structured in depth interviews provides guidance but leaves also room for extra clarification (Frey & Oishi 1995). To avoid the loss of focus and running out of time during the interviews an initial questionnaire was made, see appendix A. Using employees from different
companies with different functions and different positions in the hierarchy will provide broader insights and multiple perspectives. A document analysis will be used to complement and correct the data gained from the interviews. Triangulation (Yin, 2014) makes the data more fact based and less biased. The initial questionnaire has been tested on MSc Marketing students on beforehand to test fluency and clarity since they have a certain amount of
knowledge required to play the role and time and money constrains limited other options. The interviews with the experts will be stored in interview transcripts and audio recordings, see appendix B.
2.2 Quality criteria
To provide the basis for agreement on research results we address the research quality criteria controllability, reliability and validity (Yin, 2014; Van Aken et al., 2007).
Controllability
To make this research controllable the methodology chapter of this research describes every step that has been taken to come to the proposed conclusions and in addition, the initial questionnaire and the interview transcripts can be found in appendices B and C.
Reliability
23
interviewee was asked to think together with a partner of two campaigns. One advertisement that created successfully a mind-shift and a role change and an advertisement which results were disappointing and even resulted in a counter narrative. Moreover before the interview started the interviewee was asked if he read the send documents and if everything was clear or if he had any questions. To increase certainty a detailed description plus case example was given about the Imagineering method and the constructs: narrative, mind-shift, role change and counter narrative. Situation bias was limited by interviewing the respondents on different times and different locations. Extra benefit derived from that the interviews took place at different times was that the focus could switch to questions that had be coffered less extensively in previous semi-structured interviews.
Validity
Validity is the third major criterion for the evaluation of research results and refers to the relationship between the research results and the way it has been generated within the
research (Van Aken et al., 2007). There are three different types of validity: construct validity, internal validity and external validity. Construct validity is defined as the extent to which a measuring instrument measures what is intended to measure (Cooper & Schindler, 2008) and is covered due to the fact that constructs (Legitimacy and identification) are operationalized based on multiple academic articles. Internal validity concerns conclusions about the relationship between phenomena (Van Aken et al., 2007). Open questions were asked with extra focus on variables raised by interviewees that were not mentioned in the literature study on beforehand in order to allow relevant specific concepts, cultural references or contextual issues to come forward (Cooper & Schindler, 2008). To address the external validity, the “generalizability or transfer of research results and conclusions to other people, organizations, countries, and situations”, the interviews were hold with employees of different companies and the examples each interviewee gave of (un)successful advertisement campaigns were multiple and different (Van Aken et al., 2007).
Data analysis
24
25
3. Results
This chapter gives an overview of the interview results. Per paragraph the cases mentioned by one expert are analyzed on the presence of the five concepts and their relation, with special focus on the three proposed intermediate steps, displayed in conceptual model (see figure 2.2). The findings are analyzed to gain insights in the drivers for successful campaigns and the reasons that other campaigns had disappointing results or even caused a counter. Success is here defined as the extent to which a message send out by a company with the goal to create a positive mind-shift indeed causes a positive mind-shift. The semi-structured interviews caused interesting insights in the process of messages acceptance. Of these insights, not all can be translated back to the propositions and will therefore be covered in a separate paragraph. Quotes from the interviewee will be provided to ensure clear evidence of the constructs within the data. Not all quotes will be mentioned, only the ones that were said with confidence, with absence of a steering questions and had vivid examples.
26
3.1 Ogilvy cases
IBM
IBM has positioned themselves new in the market five years ago with the tag line: Smarter planet. This implies ‘making the world a better place through technology and this
compromises more than IT alone’. Therefore the partners IBM does business with are also no longer exclusively IT people. IBM had a sub-theme called “Smarter cities” and Ogilvy had the task to approach Dutch municipal governance with the aim to get IBM a seat at the table with decision makers of Dutch municipal governance. To open up the conversation with the city governance and to change the way IBM and the officials talks to each other a campaign was set up. Step one has been taken through translating the narrative “Smarter city” to another sensegiving device, constructing a new reality of today’s cities with a prominent role for technology to improve citizens daily lives. This new sensegiving device was the result from a brainstorm session with kids, a luminous zebra crossing. This idea was implemented in one the main streets of Rotterdam and the whole process was posted on Youtube. “Right after the campaign was launched municipal officials were on the phone with sales people of IBM with the question how technology could improve their city environment?, because what they saw was really good”. In this quote are multiple steps of the conceptual model. First of all, officials used the information they received form the video commercial about the luminous zebra crossing to make up an opinion, which is step two. After this process officials started to contact IBM with a positive approach, a signal interpreted here as that officials found it appropriate and not illegitimate, confirmed with the reaction: “this is really good” hence also step three of perceived legitimacy is taken. And because the officials asked “what can you do for us?” they wanted to be associated with IBM, step three. And finally a mind-shift appeared among customers but also employees. “ We have turned the process, IBM does not say anymore: “here’s a product, buy it”. Now we ask what are your core problems in the city and what can we do with technology to help you?, completely tailor made”.
KFC
The campaign of KFC, a fast-food company, resulted in his context in disappointing results. KFC posted on liberation day in the Netherlands a picture of two drumsticks on their
27
KFC to a celebration day, gaining image transfer and transform their Facebook fans into KFC buyers. Then people received this post on their Facebook page and used this to make an opinion, thus also step two is taken. But here the process ended since the majority of the reactions had the negative tenor of “how dare you to link a celebration day to fattened chicken”. “People perceived it was not appropriate to link a celebration day to the delicate matter of animal freedom in the food industry”. People did not thought it was legit and this resulted in people who dissociate oneself from the post with a negative comment. Hence this campaign stops at step three of the conceptual model.
3.2 KesselsKramer cases Yes/No
28
Fairbezig
The combined campaign of three fair trade brands resulted in disappointing results. Three fair-trade companies worked together to increase their market share and brand awareness of fair trade products, the result was the narrative “Fairbezig” (Be fair).
The three companies had different interest, one organization wanted to increase the logo awareness, another the sales of non-food products and another the sales of fair-trade food. As a result it became a very scattered campaign with every now and then some messages which could not create any impact. Translated to the conceptual model, step one, the send preferred reality is already vague “it was an extra message in a tangle of fair-trade labels” and the preferred constructed reality didn’t came across. Before the campaigns started it was known that especially higher educated people were positive about fair-trade products “so we thought we have to convince the rest of the market, a totally wrong interpretation since that group cost much more energy to convince, we overestimate the involvement people had with fair-trade products”. With the focus on less educated people the three fair-trade companies advertised their Fairbezig message in the newspaper de Telegraaf, on television channel sbs 6, at a gardening show and in the program of a famous Dutch weather man. “ one million people saw him talking about fair-trade bananas, but nobody could give a damn at eleven a clock at night”. In sum, the awareness about Fairbezig was low and the target group that was reached, step two, didn’t perceived the campaign as something wanted and therefore didn’t adopt it. Hence, this campaign remain at step two and three of the conceptual model.
Liga
A second unsuccessful campaign that had to start a movement was the #ertegenaan (#comeon) from Liga a Dutch biscuit company. If you posted a tweet with #ertegenaan it became visible on the top banner of nu.nl a popular news website. “But you can’t assume that every time you think of something interactive people will become your mascot”. Translated to the conceptual model, step one, the preferred reality send out is already poor received. “First people didn’t notice it since there are so many adds, and second it was completely clear that the campaign had a commercial aim, so you’re not going to tweet something unless you can win
29
who did did not perceive the message as desirable because it was only benefitting the sales of Liga. According to the expert the message could be desirable and even temporarily linked to once self-concept, through sharing it with friends, if you could win something. Summed up, the campaign failed almost already in step one of the conceptual model and were the
campaign did reach step two, people thought the campaign only benefitted Liga and the campaign was therefore unwanted and illegitimate.
3.3 G2K cases
The expert of G2K had only one example of a campaign that tried unsuccessfully to evoke a mind-shift and therefore the interview had a more general character about drivers for narrative acceptance. The other insights can be found in the next paragraph which combines the other findings.
Domesta
30
Table 3.1 the results of the field research.
Case Step
IBM KFC Yes/No Liga Domesta
Narrative/ sense-giving
√
“Smarter cities” and the luminous zebra crossing√
Facebook post with image of two drumsticks and the message “freedom gives you wings”√
Becoming an organ donor is a very simple choice: “Yes/No”√
A tweet posted with #ertegenaan becomes visible on the top banner of the news web site nu.nl√
“Vital neighborhood” coupled with an online pin board so share ideas Sense- Making P1 No information received of when and how the officials noticed the sensegivingNo information received of when and how the recipients noticed the sensegiving
No information received of when and how the recipients noticed the sensegiving
X
“People didn’t notice it since there are so many adds”√
/
X
Invitations were only send to a select amount of stakeholders. Perceived legitimacy P2√
City officials contact IBM and state “this is really good”X
Recipients of the Facebook massage stated “how dare you to link a celebration day to fatted chicken”.√
Organizations ordered their own campaign poster and individuals posted on social media they were donorX
“The once who did didn’t perceived the message as desirable because it was only benefitting the sales of Liga”X
31
3.4 Other findings
There were multiple other findings that did relate directly to one of the steps in the conceptual model but the context like a well described case was missing. Therefore these extra findings are described here.
Sensegiving
Proposition one states: the more an individual is exposed to sensegiving devices like the narrative, the more likely it is that the individual uses that knowledge to make sense of the situation.
In this paragraph strategies are mentioned that have the goal to make individuals use the preferred reality send out by the company as knowledge to make their opinion. This is important because the preferred reality send out by the company is created to create a mind-shift but more precise also to give the products cachet, “the worst thing a brand can happen is that it is purely chosen by the costumer because the product is functionally so good”.
Competition causes a continuous flow of product improvement and if customers were chosen products solely on the functionality, companies could not reap the benefits from the
innovation effort. “So you need next to a functional connection also an emotional connection which offer much more durable value”. The first strategy is to bring the problem back to its essence and know where the company in its core really stands for. This serves as the base for consistency, stated explicitly as important since a (prospective) “customers can only form strong associations if the brand propagates a consistent image”.
32
by the target audience and subsequently evoke a reaction or opinion is that “you need to have somewhere in your communication something that rubs or even polarizes”. By creating contradictions, such as for example the in-group/out-group differences are heightened such as the “think different” campaign the perceived distinctiveness of the organizational identity increases (Pratt, 1998). “If you want to have your target group become fan of your brand you
may sometimes have to make sure that the rest of the world is against you”. So the brand gets more customers who consciously choose that brand. “Standing for something is important since people choose the product were its stands for and not for the specifications”. But in order to find that trigger you need customer insights. “Every form of communication is
backed by a good customer insight”. As mentioned by Sen an Bhattacharya (2003) knowledge about a company identity is likely to be necessary to make identity-based judgments but perceived identity attractiveness is required for identification.
33
Perceived legitimacy
Derived from proposition two and three, the antecedents of consumer-company identification are respectively perceived legitimacy and sensemaking.
In this paragraph strategies and insights are mentioned that enhances the sensemaking process and the perceived legitimacy. If the customer has received the company message and asks himself “what is going on?” the customer tries to align their perception of the new situation with their view of the old situation. All three experts act on this fact by creating a common ground with the target group. So next to that a message has to be clear and simple, “because we are not all PhD students”, the message should tap in to the target groups current
experience and perception. Creating a common ground or being perceived as similar is also supported in the literature. Peloza and Papania (2008) argue that stakeholders will typically evaluate the actions of the firm in relation to their own interests. One expert indicated that they have tools to track conversation of fans from the brand on social media and blogs. You open the dialogue with delving into the world of the customer and his challenges” and from that common ground “you create in a special way solutions, you show your unique value to the target audience so they will be triggered to start the dialogue with the company”.
Customer insights can be used to find shared interest and similarities thereby trying to gain value congruence, an important antecedent of how attractive the firm’s identity is to enhance one’s self-concept (Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001; Scott & Lane, 2000).
A factor that undermines the perceived legitimacy is the perceived difference between the promise and practice. The example was given of UPS that advertised with being fast and save. As reaction somebody posted a video of a UPS delivery guy who was throwing a television. You have to know the existing opinions about your brand, “if there are already negative sentiments of your brand, people are more eager to counter your message”.
One expert referred to the figuratively transformation of the customer from dog to a cat. “You used to throw a bone and the dog came back to bring it to you, today is the customer a cat who doesn’t bring back his food, no he wants to be engaged, you have to do allot more, look at his world and link up”. And “ what you tell the customer will not be copied blindly
34
about Moleskine, a sketchbook brand. Because one way to get people to participate with your campaign is that you could also explicitly state “can you help us?” “ It is super simple but also super flattering, cause you’re actually saying to the customer that he knows better. That tickles his or her ego and is hard to say no to”. Moleskine asked his customers, of which most of them work in the creative industry, to come up with a new logo. But customers were the opposite of flattered and said that this was disrespect towards their profession. ”I think this a lack of empathy, not knowing how the customers feel and think. This is of course afterwards but in the question beholds some undervaluation”.
35
4. Discussion and provisional conclusions
Field research resulted in many interesting insights. And in this chapter the insights will be used to sharpen the propositions and subsequently the conceptual model. Furthermore conclusions will be drawn about the other findings of the interviews and consequently come to conclusions about the process of consumer acceptance and resistance of company
narratives. This final chapter concludes with practical implications and directions for future research.
4.1 Conclusions about propositions and the research question
A literature review has led to plausible and relevant constructs that form barriers between the first two steps of the IM, respectively the Narrative and Mind-shift. To further enhance the plausible refinement of the IM, advertisement experts were interviewed. In the interviews propositions served as a base for questions about advertisement campaigns that had the aim to evoke a mind-shift. The cases mentioned by the experts were analyzed on the presence of the proposed five steps, the steps characteristics and the relation between the steps. In table 4.1 the results of the field research are given. For the campaigns that achieved successfully a mind-shift among its target group, IBM and Yes/No, it can be stated that except for
sensemaking, the other steps were identified and positive and were identified in that order. Moreover table 4.1 also shows those campaigns that tried to create a positive mind-shift but failed. The campaigns, KFC, Liga and Domesta did not pass one of the proposed steps. Now per proposition provisional conclusion will be drawn.
Proposition 1: the more an individual is exposed to sensegiving devices such as the narrative, the more likely it is that the individual uses that knowledge to make sense of the situation. In other words the relationship between the narrative and customer sensemaking is mediated by the perceived amount of knowledge the individual has.
36
sensegiving device is poorly noticed a weak foundation is laid, because both campaigns did not recover. Findings did not cause a revision of this proposition.
Proposition 2: the more an individual can make sense of the situation, the greater the chance that the individual will perceive the sensegiving device as legitimate. In other words the relationship between narrative and the individuals’ perception of the organization as legitimate is mediated by the extent to which an individual can make sense of the situation.
For this proposition more case insights are available. As table 4.1 shows there is a clear division between the successful cases, IBM and Yes/No, and the unsuccessful, KFC, Liga and Domesta. Were both successful cases received already first indications of perceived
legitimacy through oral commentary and orders of campaign material, the progress of the unsuccessful campaigns kept being stuck at the intention of the message. Here the message was unwanted due to perception of a bad taste in humor, or the commercial aim was to obvious or the message was to unclear to be perceived as legit. As well the successful as the unsuccessful campaigns confirm proposition two and do not cause a revision of the
proposition.
Proposition 3: the more an individual perceives the target organization as legitimate, the greater the chance that the individual will identify with the target organization. In other words the relationship between the narrative and identification with the narrative is mediated by the perceived legitimacy of the organization.
In line with proposition two, a difference can be seen between the successful cases, IBM and Yes/No, and the unsuccessful cases, KFC, Liga and Domesta. Where both successful cases received request and confirmation to be associated with the target group and to set up co-creative activities, the unsuccessful campaigns receive neutral and negative reactions derived from the disidentification. Thereby the advantage gets further expanded. Proposed relations are acknowledged and do not cause a revision of this proposition
37
The successful cases, IBM and Yes/No took all former intermediate steps and subsequently created a mind-shift among the target group. Through co-creation activities IBM changed the way it does business and the Yes/No campaign engaged individuals to the extent they became advocates of the campaign. Both times the identification was turned into a mind-shift. This result is reflective to the unsuccessful cases, KFC, Liga and Domesta which ended in
resistance towards the narrative. As the campaign of KFC resulted in negative word of mouth and the other two cases in ignoring the narrative. Therefore the propositions are
acknowledged and it remains plausible that the more an individual identifies with an
organization, the smaller the chance a counter narrative will be created. A possible addition to the conceptual model when it is placed back in the total IM comes from the disidentification in the KFC case. Disassociating is often accompanied with negative word of mouth or an opposing sensegiving device earlier mentioned as a counter. Therefore when the intermediate steps are added to the total IM, the positive track continuous with the next step upwards in the IM: “Role”, and the negative track to resistance bends to the right and stops. Behind this bend the consequences of non-acceptance should be added like resistance and negative word of mouth. So in further implementations of the IM symptoms of resistance towards co-creation can earlier and easier be recognized and researched.
Extra findings
In line with the exploratory character of this research new insights have been gained about strategies that enhance the narrative acceptance and will be summarized below.
First of all, the organization should stand out with the narrative itself and the way it is constructed. Furthermore the message should be simple and clear. Secondly in order to be perceived as legit is important to have customer insights so you can create a common ground. But important to state here, as results show, it may not always be a good idea to completely dance to the tune of the customer. Expert stated as important that to evoke a reaction you need something in your communication that rubs. A polarizing campaign makes the organizational identity more stand out. Besides these tactics it can be stated that overall the choice to
38
4.2 Managerial implications
This report contains important practical conclusions. Especially for the first step from the narrative to the mind-shift were the engagement is built which serves the constant initiator of continuing change in the IM. Evidently it is of utmost importance that the narrative is
accepted and creates a mind-shift. The conceptual model, figure 2.1 is a visual framework that should be used to increase the narrative acceptance when the IM is implemented. The model enhances the understanding and controllability of creating, sending and accepting the
narrative, since it gives a visual representation of the micro-social interactions that ‘give birth’ to social emerge. Furthermore the model can serve as base for asking questions about the course of stakeholder acceptance. As the knowledge is broadened about the first steps in the discursive process of the IM the overall employability and longevity of the complete IM is improved. Derived from the extra results it is important to stand out and be consistent in order to be noticed and to start the sensemaking among stakeholders. In addition, the importance of customer intelligence is stressed because it serves as the base to create a common ground with the target audience which increases the perceived legitimacy. And secondly in order to evoke a message, the narrative may need something that rubs or polarizes and customer intelligence serves as a base to find that spot. The polarization should be in line with the culture since
people identify with an object if it enhances their self-esteem and therefore the object should be perceived as desirable and appropriate within the context and the leading culture. But if accepted by the majority, the narrative will be amplified by all the interpretations and conversations that build upon one another and emerge into something big.
4.3 Limitations and directions for future research
Although the literature research and field research resulted in acceptance of the proposed constructs and the conceptual model, this report is only the first step in broadening the knowledge on how to prevent a counter narrative. The semi-structured interviews resulted in very rich data that did not arise when an evaluative research was done. But non evaluative research is at the expense of less focus on specific constructs. Therefore the dimensionality of the intermediate steps need to be specified and empirically validated. Although the
39
find a relevant campaign and then the expert that produced it. Also in relation to the relevant cases, search for campaigns that are relatively new to decrease the respondent bias. Further there’s a difference noticed, data from this report state that the message should be clear and simple where Nijs (2014) proposes that the narrative should invites for interpretation. Hence, the question arises what are here the right proportions? Lastly, the results indicated the importance of the context in the process of creating a mind-shift. A narrative or other sensegiving device should not stand alone but should be backed by supporting events. What kind of events in what order and for who would create the highest engagement and
acceptance? Nijs (2014) for example indicates that one the major problems of the IM is that is seems hard to convince people when there’s no sense of urgency. Press and Arnould (2011) indicate the difference in context between employees and customers and their exposure to sensegiving devices. What are the characteristics of a fertile context and how to design such a context?
40
References
Ashforth, Blake E., Spencer H. Harrison, and Kevin G. Corley. "Identification in
organizations: An examination of four fundamental questions." Journal of Management 34.3 (2008): 325-374.
Bartel, Caroline A., and Raghu Garud. "The role of narratives in sustaining organizational innovation." Organization Science 20.1 (2009): 107-117.
Berendse, Myrte, Hanneke Duijnhoven, and Marcel Veenswijk. "Editing narratives of change. Identity and legitimacy in complex innovative infrastructure organizations." Intervention
Research 2.1 (2006): 73-89.
Bhattacharya, C. B., and Kimberly D. Elsbach. "Us versus them: The roles of organizational identification and disidentification in social marketing initiatives." Journal of Public Policy &
Marketing 21.1 (2002): 26-36.
Bhattacharya, Chitrabhanu B., and Sankar Sen. "Consumer-company identification: A framework for understanding consumers’ relationships with companies." Journal of
marketing 67.2 (2003): 76-88.
Brown, Andrew D. "Narcissism, identity, and legitimacy." Academy of management Review 22.3 (1997): 643-686.
Cooper, D.R., & Schindler, P.S. (2008). Business Research Methods 10th ed. New York: McGraw Hill.
Dovey, Ken, and Bryan Fenech. "The Role of Enterprise Logic in the Failure of Organizations to Learn and Transform A Case from the Financial Services Industry." Management Learning 38.5 (2007): 573-590.
Dowling, John, and Jeffrey Pfeffer. "Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational behavior." Pacific sociological review (1975): 122-136.
Elsbach, Kimberly D., and C. B. Bhattacharya. "Defining who you are by what you're not: Organizational disidentification and the National Rifle Association." Organization Science 12.4 (2001): 393-413.
Fiss, P. C. and Zajac, E. J. (2006), “The symbolic management of strategic change: Sensegiving via framing and
decoupling”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 49, pp. 1173–1193.
41
Ford, Jeffrey D. "Organizational change as shifting conversations." Journal of Organizational
Change Management 12.6 (1999): 480-500.
Gemmill, Gary, and Charles Smith. "A dissipative structure model of organization transformation." Human Relations 38.8 (1985): 751-766.
Humphreys, Michael, and Andrew D. Brown. "Narratives of organizational identity and identification: A case study of hegemony and resistance." Organization Studies 23.3 (2002): 421-447.
Kane, Rachel E., Marshall J. Magnusen, and Pamela L. Perrewé. "Differential effects of identification on extra-role behavior." Career Development International 17.1 (2012): 25-42. Lam, Son K., Michael Ahearne, Ye Hu, and Niels Schillewaert (2010), "Resistance to Brand Switching When a Radically New Brand Is Introduced: A Social Identity Theory
Perspective," Journal of Marketing, 74, 128-46.
Mael, Fred A., and Blake E. Ashforth. "Loyal from day one: Biodata, organizational
identification, and turnover among newcomers." Personnel Psychology 48.2 (1995): 309-333. Maitlis, Sally, and Thomas B. Lawrence. "Triggers and enablers of sensegiving in
organizations." Academy of management Journal 50.1 (2007): 57-84.
Porter, Michael E., and Mark R. Kramer. "The big idea: creating shared value." Harvard
Business Review 89.1 (2011): 2.
Press, Melea, and Eric J. Arnould. "How does organizational identification form? A consumer behavior perspective." Journal of Consumer Research 38.4 (2011): 650-666.
Ramirez, R. (1999), “Value co-production: Intellectual origins and implications for practice and research”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 20, pp. 49-65.
Rouse, W.B. and Baba, M.L. (2006), “Enterprise Transformation, Fundamental enterprise changes begin by looking at the challenges from technical, behavioural, and social
perspectives”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 49, No. 7, pp. 67-34.
Scott, Susanne G. and Vicki R. Lane (2000), "A Stakeholder Approach to Organizational identity," Academy of Management Review, 25 (1), 43-62.
42
Suchman, Mark C. "Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches." Academy
of management review 20.3 (1995): 571-610.
Van Doorn, J., Lemon, K. N., Mittal, V., Nass, S., Pick, D., Pirner, P., & Verhoef, P. C. (2010). Customer engagement behavior: theoretical foundations and research directions.
Journal of Service Research, 13(3), 253-266.
Walker, C. O., Greene, B. A., & Mansell, R. A. (2006). Identification with academics, intrinsic/extrinsic motivation, and self-efficacy as predictors of cognitive engagement.
Learning and Individual Differences, 16(1), 1-12.
Wolter, Jeremy Scott. "Four Essays On Organizational Identification As A Marketing Strategy." (2014).
Books
Nijs, Diane, Imagineering the Butterfly Effect: Designing for Organizational Emergence, Designing for Organizational Emergence, 2014
Van Aken, J.E., Berends, H., & van der Bij, H. (2007). Problem Solving in Organizations: a Methodological Handbook for Business Students, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Yin, R.K. (2014). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (5rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
43
Appendix A
Advertisement agency and interviewees
Ogilvy: Johan Karper,
Kessels&Kramer: Camiel Bulder G2K: Jascha Tuinier
Initial questionnaire
Inleiding: 10 min Voorstellen / bedanken,
Zo u/jij je ook even willen voorstellen, wat je functie is?
We schatten dat het ongeveer een uur gaat duren maximaal anderhalf.
Als u het geen probleem vind zouden we het graag willen opnemen. Alle informatie zal vertrouwelijk worden omgegaan en als u iets wilt terug nemen is dat mogelijk.
Zoals we hadden besproken in de mail zijn wij bezig met een vervolg studie naar de
Imagineering methode. Die word beschreven proefschrift van Diane Nijs onder begeleiding van prof. Jo van Engelen (Raad van bestuur van o.a. APG, ANWB en succesvol interim manager) die nu ook ons begeleid in het onderzoek.
We hebben een samenvatting van de Imagineering methode naar je op gestuurd. - Heb je/heeft u die gelezen en zijn daar nog vragen over?
Samengevat is het doel van de Imagineering methode er voor te zorgen dat d.m.v. een nieuw logo en slogan, samen de narrative, de belanghebbende groepen zoals klanten maar ook leveranciers inspireren tot een constructieve dialoog tussen die groepen die uit zichzelf doorgaat en wat er voor zorgt dat het bedrijf in een staat komt van continue verbeteren en daarmee een antwoord bied op de complexiteit van de markt.
